The Sun. — London, England, 1808-02-06 00:00:00

6 IMPET:IAL PARLIAMENT. z I HOUSE OF PEERS, FRIDAY, I'M 6.- The Arm!' BISHOP of Yoax .tOolc the. Paths and hi 4 Seat. .His Grace wasNotrocluce;tl between the fliAcips of Bangor and Bristol. 12ordi Hu7•cIIIN6UN and GLASTONBURY took the Oaths nod their,-Seats. . _ The consideration of Sir James Innes's Pctition, • respcoi,4the 110*burgh Peerages, 14.'14 , 3111;3011M" 011 Mvtion of Lortl AUCKLAND; when, after soot, cotwersatiOn with the LORD CHANCELLOR, it axreed that so touch of the.said Petition as re. lated.to the; 1),., rages, be referred to the Committee '. of I), iviteges. The fridi Appeal, Gould v Langley, WdS finally .decided; the LORD CHANCELLOR affirming the De - crce tit the Iris ft Court of Chancery, with 1001. costs. Au Accoutit was presented from the Bank of Eng- Lod, of the Receipts attd Disbursements of the , Couiignees for the Liquidation of the National ribbt for the last year.—Ordered to lie on the table. • Adjourned till Monday , ROMA' OF COMMONS. VIUDAY, Mi. 5. " • *Thiit Chairman of the Conunittee on the Chippen ,bain Tlettion; reported that Mr. Dawkins was duly elected ) , and that Mr. Blake was not; and that the /I( , turn . was not frivolous nor corrupt. Mr. Hase, from the Bank, presented an Account of the. Expenditure 01.9,500,04 under the Atli' for the Reduation ()tithe National' Debt, and also of the Receipt of 2,400,00 p l: to be applied to the same porpo!e in the next ()darter. .• Mr. Dawes, from the Bank, presented an Account of the Amount' of Dividends and Lottery Prizes un-, -claimed ter the list three quarters. M. Rost.: brought in a !Sill for the better Regula tion Of the. Office of Treasurer of the Navy.--Redd a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Monday. The third reading of the American Treaty Bill was poStponed till Monday. Mi. SWAN rilLiVCd that the Order for taking into con4ideration the Penrhyn Election Petition be poet- pored tilahursday t . 241 h'Mareb.--Ordervd, with the* consent of Ow other party, signified by Mr. D. Gtoni. Mr. Huskissota brought in the Bill for the conti nuance of the Laud and Malt Tax.---Read a first time, .irdered to he read a second time on Mot day. Also a Bill for the Regulating the Payment of Exchequer Bills. On the Motion of Mr. livsmstiobii it was order ed that there be l a id b e f ore t h e HoUse an account of Annutties and, Exchequer Bills, tq be paid on the sth of April, .1808.' Also accounts of Interest paid on Ezehequvr STATE PAPERS. Mr. WitUriiKCAD.WiShed to know from the Bight Hon: ,Secretary, tor Foreign Affairs, whether he had any ni)je,lion to lay befbre'the HOuse Copies of the toters Iron) which he had read extra in a late . debate. He was deiiirous to know particularly Wile. tiler there was any ohje6tion to the prod* lion of the Letter lrom Gad Ho wick to Mr. Garlicke, and the Letter from 414 r. Bust, on the subjed of the Or.. tiers 01 . Council,. with L or d i lio.,‘"iek's A nswer. I t was due in tairneis to Lord Flowiek, as this last bad been nuts It dwelt upon, to present it before the House a full and unreserved form. • Mr. CA KING wished the Hon. Gentleman either tp mn t i a motion or to give notice of one. Re simnid then know what answer to give. It wain usual either to make a Communication on these sub jects in private conversations, •or to give .previous notice publicly. Mr. W rati hA n gave notice for Monday he did not want any private conversation. A MLN) It on the Opposition Bench, whose name we 6,1 11,,,t I,•arn, gave ootieept` his intention to move on Monday for a Copy of the instructions tOt.Earl St Vincent, previous to his proceeding to fa l hon in the 'year. 1797, and an Account Of What had been done upon these Instrudions. HANK ARRANGEMENT. At the desire of 'Mr. TtatotaY, who stated that i t Wou ld be matter of personal convenience to him, the' Cu kriCELLOK Of the Eseillt4oSit, always ready to attend to 3by suggeitiop of the Lion. Gentle. man, and h3ppy ou this ()cession to skew his readi. 11U33 to py ,itch attentien . In consulting the parti cular 'wa t er: ience of the Gentletuan, agreed to postpone from Monday till Wednesday his in tended statement 61 the arrangement between the Bank' and the Public, with respect to the manage meat of the Public Debt, and acuommadation by an advance. of money. „..COMNUTTkE UN stirt , Lv. Soveral gams, including one 10,000,000, one of boot), on of 1,000,000, were voted for the Lx chequer Bills outstanding; but Irma the Low tone in which the whole was expressed, we cawiot lie pr,xise in our - matarnent.---The Re port i 6 to be received on :Monday. DANtstt SToittts. • • • T 1 nioyed, , that there be laid before the 'I. 0u an *mint of. the Naval and' Military Stor' , ...s taken pi Copenhagen ; the quality arrd condi tion of each description, and Like estimated value.:: p f ir. LiosN.ts,); , l sxtw no objeaion'to the produe- tinn'of the. Peper,,but as the stores were yet unhand e,l, it - wouhd be sonic. , time betbre the return could be it car!e. conceived, that the wishpf Parlia ment to have the account mak be' the means of ex poditing thellading•--The axount was ordered. ORDERS OF COUNCIL; PRuctwAL moved, th'.irthe Ii )use should re... fy , 'lve itself inm a Committee of Ways and Means,' to tvilieb the 0i rs of Council relating to the Com o lerro of NieutiaiNittiOtig should be, referred. IM :1 PETTY' 'had hoped, that before this 11 . 14 u Lion should b,t- brought forward some ex planfttory would liave been produced, and some (Apia.- til,:tri; statements made to reni.,ve the doubts which ti ;1S to tilt: legliitta 00 Orders, themselves: tiv.:;re wore 'doubt to legaliiy, onsfit. to be' removed,, before tho i3oeti ou asks d for the Ordt2rs tfte Urgu ; in the present htage wonld bt direiSti A l sol e l y *ogality, fir the potiry of the'Orders - eould be t d avenieutV CaiIVCN:6OLi in thoCommittec. Hit 0.1 t certainly felt great difficulty in eetering into au argu went on this head. - riAlearned as he was in the law, like the majority of the Meinbersof . that he was perhaps unfit to fortn an opinion oldie strict legal tight. But since the majority of the House must be made to feel and to understand the legal) ight , before they wetild consent to give their sandton, he as well as any other may venture to state .how far, according to his opinion, that legality may be doubt : ed. HO certainly felt how inadeqUatelie . was to op. pose the Right Hon. Gentleman on a question of law, and particuAarty when supported by the other high legal authorities who must necessarily have been 'consulted on .the drawing tie , Of the 4 Orders. But no respeel for, any authority Should deter him from opposing what he conceived to bas contrary to the la* of nations and the laWs of the ', land. ,The Privy Council arras limited in :respell to the orders it may issue by the law of nations, as well. ' as the 'Prize Courts and the Cotirt ofAdmiralty ; and there as well as every where else the exercise of the prerogative was limited by fixed rules. This doctrine Was sanctioned by the ; higlicstz legal opinions. It: would e found in the celebrated letter refe'rro - to in the Duke of Newcastle's; Paper , respecting, the Prussian ships, and signed by Sir Dudley Ryder tied Mr. Mur,ty. It was expressly down' by these great authorities, that the Court or Privy Calmed' was subject to the Law of Nations as well as the Priie Court 'and the Court 'of Admiralty. There was besides the principle, that Government was ne ver to het:tit/re in such cases, and that DO instruc tions were given to Jud,ses. It was the als' inlet) of. Lord Elden, expressed on an appeal in the last war, that the Orders of Council were.nothing but - a defi nitiou of what was at that time held to be the Law of Nations, on the particular points of the Declara tion. It was theretiire now a fair matter of ineetry, : . how far the provisions of theQrders of ouneil were consistent with the law of nations and the law of the land. Whatever extraordinary do- trines ' arise out of the circumstances of the times, and : .vhsteyer eetraordinery acts May arise out of those do6trines, it could never lie allowed that the Privy Council should arrogate to its e lf w h a t' was t h e busi ness ofParliament. It was not consistent with the Law of Nations to seize the ships of ueutrals, nor could a mere principle of retaliation upon a third party justify such a seizure. The Order of Coutieil of the 7th January last year, was in reAaliation for a Degree of the French Govertimt m. That Decree) F.9notsted of two parts, one of ,vhich went to pre-: ; vent the consumption or adotiasitY , ot tithe other to place the British Isla in a state . of lockade, This last was indeed a vain boast : it . was incapable of execution, and no attempt eau been ever made to execute it. It was a rule Of toe admi nistration of public law, that any general principle laid down, and nut carried into etfed, was to be cOnsidercxl. as not of fOrce. He •W'is enabled * to quote, from the reports of 'Mr. Robinson, which were equally valuable to the legal practitioner for their accuracy, team chetsical reader lee elegance, and to poiterity for the admirable style in which they transmitted knowledge of the must valuable kind; In these Reports it was laid down, that aluere de claration of blockade was not sufficient to gist, cue rights against infra6tioh of that blockade, unlesS there was really a force to render that blockade ef fe6tual. Was there any terve to render the Decree ! of general blockade effectual on the part of the ,Wrench ?, Certainly there was no reason to suppos e ; that the principle of the Decree would be entore c d with respea to America, and America was the Nett. tral , Power that way most to be looked to in the present question. In the explanation that had taken place between M. necres, the 'French Minister of 'Marini!, to Mr. Armstrong, the: American Minister, the intention of executing the restridions at sea was I expressly disavowed. This successful attempt at explanation by America afforded' an elucidatien of the intentions of France. The Order of the 7th of January, roweled upon this information, was a. re, taliation of that measure and character which be.: , came this Country;. and was calculated to be 04.. teal without being injurious. The trade of neutrals) from one enemy's port to another, was a- thing; by the restridion of which, much injury way be (lone to the enemy, at the same time that neutrals conk; not complain. For by the Order of 175 0; this ptin, ciplu. was plainly laid down, and neutrals could not complain when they were only prevented from ing for Powers in a state of war what thes o same Powers prevented them,from doing in time of peace; This trade was at once stopped, and a powet of do ing mere was reserved, it the conduct of France ehould be such As to require m ore , t h at is; if France Should be rigorous, 'awl the neutrals should submit. The' Order of Council in Noyenther was notjustf. i ftable i but even it' there were a justifiable cause for it, the policy of at to such au extent ppm th at cause was doulatfill... The explanation g i ven b y M. Dccres, the French Minister of, Marine, to General Armstrong, the American Mitiister, athounted to au assurance that there was no intention to eutbrce the rigours of the . French Decrees at sea. All that was intended to he executed was 4111 .internal restriction' against. the adniiision of English goeds, and even the vessels that brolght those goods are exempted from' the condemnation that attached to thv . gi)ods, thetn solves: This' was nothing more than . what every in dependent Power was at liberty to do, in the free exercise of an option to trade with another or not ;• and though . it may be done with a ho,tile view to wards Britain, it admitted not a retaliation in which neutrals were to be the principal sull'erers. The Law of Nations and the Law of the !:and forbad the entrance o f ne u tra l s by leompulsion into our ports, and the prohibition of their stilling unle ss with a licenee. from our Poverinnent. The French Governmeot required certificates of origin, in which the articles that composed thecargo were to he de clared not British ; we imposed a necessity of taking lidences from h British port, which were, equivalent to a proof that the goods were British. This was the must etFeCtual mode of promoting the views of Buottaparte. The entrance into British pOrts, and the:egress from ; these ports were, ,by the Law of Nations and by the Ltlw of the Land., .perfectly free and unrestraitied. Leoking beck to the . provisions mad v by the l.eisititurts.to this' etfed, it would bes feinal that this Ireedom of, ingress and ,egress had been provided for . as early as the ,time , of Cl non: Ingress, egrc4s, Mud every freedom of trade aud ititercourse Was proykled. .offittsi any prohi bition should arise from a higher 'authority, whi c h was explained by Lord Coke to be the authority of Parliament. The ?rotes:lion extended to the person arid the goods, as well in British ports or on British land as on the , high seas. The statuttai g, 14, and 28, Edw. 111, were specific and ample iu these pro v.isions, giving to all manner of merchatits the liberty 01 conveying their goods where they may think 'wiper. The last-mentioned Statute in particular etiatetedi that 'no ship should be compelled to put into a British port against the will of the Master and Owner, nor .be detained there. The Orders of Col3oell, violated these principles dirc&ly, for by them neutral ships were to be brought in and de tained till they preformed certain 'requisites, .withbut Which they could not be permitted to sail. The policy Of ii3llillg these Orders of Council at th e pre 'else time whe n they came put was ineenceitieble.--- Thereas a dispute with the United States, ir'con 'sequence of the affair of the: Chesapeake, and it was ;highly imprudent , to publish new matter of irri tation and dispute till the former was arranged and settled. The provisions proclaimed in there Orders of Council were injurious and effensive to America, not only as violating general law, but still more as they went to infringe a particular treaty ; a treaty - the more nicely to be respeßed as it had been recently concluded, and the ratification of it had beep adjourn ler, in fad, it was an adjou rnment o f the ratifica tion and not a refusel that had been given. That treaty was pot before the House, and therefore, could not be direOly referred to ; but the treaty between Lord Grenville and Mr. Jay, from which the provisions on this tread, were Cepied, was before the House. It 'was provided, that Arrericari shipS, which..could not be aware at 'the time ar their sailing wlnit4orts wire blockaded, should not be fereibly brought into the, ports of Britain. But under th l ! Order o f Colin cd..of t 1 1t th November, American ships were .to be detainkl, contrary to the provisions of NS Treaty. Aceordieg to the antient, but mire- Pealed Metutes ha had quoted, ruerchentS were not to , be molested.- One authority more lie bad to ad..' Aloe, te;courirm the in iiieiples 'he 'had laid doe IT this was that of Hale, as expressed in the Treaty 'De Pariah's Maris. Ali Foreign Pow e r s a t am i ty were entitled to thin fr ec cioia' of ingress and e g r ess , unless restrained by Ac:t of Parlieeont. Such was the language of Hale, with this addition, apparently prophetic. of what had now happuocd, that especial'; care should be taken of the inyrposition.of Aas:of : Council, as AOls , of Perliament, •which would be I 'Unconstitutional,' not onry hrthe undue assumptino of authority, but by levying Malley withuu‘ consent of Parliament, • by' means of licences.. How I mid Ministers exocii their mutat to be saottion ed, hv relerring their ads to the Committee of , Ways ;and Means, 'when those ACts , erein opposi tion io the Law of Nations and the law of the land, to good poll y, and the express stipulations of Trea ties, to the express rules of tie Prize Courts, and the Courts of AdMiralty. It was extremely wrong and unfair to bring forward a motion of the nature of that . now before the Hou s e, till his*Maje.sty's Ministers had obtained a Bill of Indemnity, and till the Orders of Council had themselves been sanc tioned. Sir James Marriott, who hiid so long tire sided, in the Admiralty Court, had declared, that the justice of that Court was to be administered like all, others, without reference to any orders or in struetions from the Crown, or to any limitations, except those imposed by Ate. of Parliament. Upon these established principle's of public law, acknow ledged as the standard of the condat of the British Courts of public administration, upon the Ads and Statutes, and authorities he had cited, he telt it his duty, leaving the policy of the measure out of the question, and reserving it for the Committee, where it may be more conveniently brought forward, to declare again s t the Orders. lie considered it highly derogatory to the. 'chiseler of the Country to see such things with .indifference; things contrary to all law, and not to be justified by any pripeiple of re taliation.upon enemies. Till the Bight Hon: Gen. tleinart should' convince the House of the propriety of these At s, by reference to books ' t public law and the Stattne Book,' till ho and his colleagues should hails subMitted reasons to justify a, Bill of Indemnity; and till such a Bin should have been passed,-the motion now offered Was highly int- proper. ' • The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was. ready to admit, that in the view the Noble Lord bad • taken, and conceiving as the Noble Lord did, that the law of nations and the municipal' law of - the land had.been , violated, the. Noble, I,;.ird was right in requiring explanation on these heads, before he eigreed to the Speaker's, leaving the Chair. -:.. But as lie (the Chancellor of the ' Exchequer) advised to refer these Orders of 'Council to the Committee of Ways and Meani, and as 44 looked,epon them ni. I neither contrary to the -law of nations or to the law 1 .f th,; laud, he was prepared .to maintain the pro- priety of them to the fullest. extent. The. Noble Lord wished now to argue the legality of these Orders of 'CoLipL'il, and to reserve the question of policy.lo another stage of the business, . But as the legality was so 'far from' being decisive as to the policy; in the Noble Lord's opinion, the policy may as' well be . discassed first and the legality after. 'Fie objeAions in. point of law would not be found So strung as , the Noble Lord had stated them. With i respeat to the prineiple that the law' of nations Altd not admit of any variation, hot by the Privy Conn ( cil,:as the Noble Lord h a d b y m i stake stated, but by r the King in, Council, ,be was ready to allow that the prerogative was in that case limited and regulated by the same .rules of public law as in evert other. It was the exercise of the King's prerogative of war. He was free . to.admit, that neither the prerogative of the King in _Council, nor yet o n Att of Parliame ut , • nor any - other ad, of any individual nation, could change !be,general law of nations, established and acted upon by general consent. Thus, if'the thing could belegally dime at . all, it was. as, legally. done now as it conld:he.with the consent of Parliament. Whatever right there was, may be a s f a i r l y exerc i sed ,by the ' prerogative of the Crown, , the . Nation being 'at war, as enforced by the Legislative au thority. The measures that were now ,in force were suggested by the propriety of retaliating , ,the aggressions of the enemy. It was extraordinary; after the example' set by the late Administration, that the Noble Lord, condemned in Opp os i t i on w hat li'e' bad: os a Min islet' sanctioned and approved: • The Noble Lord said, that what was done by the French Decree'of September was mere matter of reghlation, dge6tille only' the internal regulations with resped to Britisli,merchandize. If the; Noble Lord thought really so, he was right in maintaining and detendin4 his opinion. But wh a t was t o be lament e d was, awl the Noble Lord was not of, the same opinion now and when in office. The Order of Coen , il, -ref striding the coasting trade of France by tweins of neutrals, was a I.roof that the late Ministers con ceived the Order to be executed beyond the bounds of mere internal regulation. If this was the senti ments of the late Ministers, then what had teippened -since to malze them think differently ?- - Was it the Jute decree ? Irwas hard, indeed, that having the authority of those who professed mildness he jeSti , fication of this rigour, those who had av0w...0 the necessity of more: naive measures, •sheuld now be condemned for - haring - followed up that, ;tut hO - santliened. He ceferred .to. former , tietei thus far, only to show that the policy now enforced had been recognised and stied upon bye e late Ministeri. The decree Of Buottaierte declared the British bleeds in a state Of blockade, and subjected British propertt to cdrifiscatiOn. This was certainly, as far as regard-/ ed the blockade, a vain and empty boast. The Nob Lord stated, on the triscchceived anthcrity of hif Learned Friend - (Sir WiltietneScott), that a declare= tion of blockade, it not followed up by an athtet blockade, .was •of Ito force in law. That may be the case With respect to a single port but when whole courney, was declared in a state Of bloCkade , the inability to: enforce that blockade in its full ex tent, proved that the declaration was intended to 'ley a grotind for the infliction of the consequent pe nal ties. The French Decrees nlledged es the ground on which they proceeded, the Sft of our dcclaring and considering as blockaded, ports befOre. Mere was not a iingle British , ehip of war, and the extension of that: principle they declared oar whole Empire • to be blockaded. Not a step taken on our part to eounteraet this . principle, was acted ttpoil and enforced by the enemy. The Noble Lord - had no a u th or i ty to bear him out. II the -Noble-Lord, was prepared to contend, that the enemy's Decree did not admit the ineauing his 'MS 'jeste's MinisierS 'affixed eti it, what ',did . mean But when they sew how it was worded and execut4 it Vi%li too much to Contend, 114 it the Pared fo ab r i b o l c o k c a k d a i d n i g eg fo t r h ce e!l e r n it , i ‘ s i r h c} !. l . l • . l ,b t ; ai ti, d; 5..11 • -masks: the approach to any-port of ..thgni lia4;u•dotts, it was not: to 'he , regnriliel• as - of -three; • France as sertipg, that ...w."ptit,,Ports . :ik ii;stote of .UlbcEt;isle, without a blockading-force, and . assuturng the right of opposing a n en e m y - w i t h every 511 and every' weapoe he used, published , the blockade of the whole BritiA bleeds. What was, to be inferred from thin, but that with Out ships to render_the ap proach to our coasts hazardous, the enemy wad& assume the right to detaiovessels approachiog them, whenever he could cateli4 hein.. Ail trade - in Eng- , lisp goods w a s pr o hibited, had all such-sweats, ever found, were declared lawthl prize. But the noble Lord-said this was of no moment, as the, in• ternal execution of the Decree in Feance' was all that was intended. - It was rather singular, however, that • the first newt . of the publication of the Decree, .at Berlin, reached this country with'an aceount having been rigorously enforced at Ha inetegh, Hato- , burgh then, as ;he noble Loal hinted across the ta under the fume,. of France, but reduced that power for the exprfss piepose of entorcieg this rigour of this Decree againseßritish commerce ,acrd pods. The santlity of every neutral the waS tQ r. 1101 h, to be most eereceirniously tc:spead.4 at 43 . ; and every right and every principle of neutral teal tory was to be violated by land. The dtitiliCtioO W; l4 the more extraordinary, as the eigouteof the Deccost seemed, to apply more to property at sea; Witt ecution was so' rigorously enforced on bad where it, may have been supposed not littended to be " e nforced at all. Lei the House recollea. Beurenue's declara tion at : Hamero',. that all who carried on trade With England supported England, and On that account the French were compelled, however reluCupily, to rake possession of Hamburg') ; that all Eoglish goods must be produced by the Tlamburghers . for the Fur' !Nap of being'confiscated, and in 4 hours.i.lotaiealart visits would be made, and punishment inflicted the disobedient. Was.rlik.COlith)ing the. oper0 8 " of the Decree to French tell ivory ? Ire whet manner I did Buonaparte explain the Decree to thelderettatitE of liamburgh e who stated that •al great part of •goOds seized belenged . to them, and that the ma sums lie was pursuing were prcgtsant gr i % Lter ruin to him than to his enemy ? 'eToefestroy tb° commerce of the vile Bugled), said he; it in ewe/ possible wet, is my object. r I have it in tey po s er I wish. to ruin Hamburg(' ; fur that.would proinotc tbts th'ilritaion of Eti4liih ceminerce." The cow' St ruct len put upon this Decree by other eountnee by Spain for - instatiec; in the rummer in 'which sl!e adoi)led itk proviinhs, proved tro, doubt wits enter' tabled by theta on the subie:L But it was conteald‘ ed the whole of the reasoning deduced from Oleo has wes done awe) , by, the riprc.,sentatiou Mock ill the French Mioister of Marine, Deerisi, t., ArmstrouL, 'lbis was the revocation with wapitis neutrals oeutralsought to have been satisfied; have induced this country to retrain then any , sure of retaliation I Demi stated as his O iiittipti" - ' his opinion merelye—not his knowledge—that Decree did n o t a l t e r the praiitice of nentraenaviea-, tion—ihat it did not afk the American coli" 1111441 '1 with France, nor alter the mode of mat 7 4 tnre. After having stated this L i i i.;olltart 4 ", opinion, he proceeded to esphin some or ditty articles of the I:),tcree, but on the in.ht ittateri a point referred Geri. Aram rot ig to the i ulster of k."r - ternal relations !'.ltevide4ll, thervfore, tendency of this French Decree was such as he ltael stated, he maintained we had a complete right to rr, tahate upon the county their awn measure!. : if i tu e. enemy declared we shonld have no trade--it . proclaimed British tnaut.itithire good pt "- a right to declare Fiend) inanutaciurea good Who Were interested in this sithied and CaPab ie " l. • appreciating it ? In the first place thu enemy, 2 ? the Gentlemen opposite who toothed the last 'nitration 3dly, the country at large; 115 &it-4 their representatives in that House ; and chip b ed. Aral nations. The opinion of the first was least nia7 teriali but still it became of soute,consetittence to know what he bad professed to, be a principle 0r t a law . of nati o ns. He had professed that by 11131 ja t's country had a right to oppose,' its eiterny with Id a own weapons. As tar therefore as liuunaparte wa .A concerned, his Majesty' Government waS warrant a tl i their proceedingi on the principles be hittlielf had • protease! ;: (tidos he fotinded his argument 01 t he assertion that we bad first infringed the 1"1, by I lot: posing a blockade. What be meant by that was 1 ,-/ very evident; probably t w blockade of ottelatur'